Separate routes from the homepage
An employer and a candidate want different things immediately. One clear path each, decided in the first screen, rather than a homepage hedging between them.
Employers and candidates want opposite things from your site. Most recruitment sites are built for one and confuse the other.
A recruitment agency website serves two audiences with conflicting needs: employers evaluating whether you can fill roles, and candidates looking for jobs. Both need clear separate paths from the homepage. Job listings must render as indexable pages, because job search is where most candidate traffic originates.
An employer and a candidate want different things immediately. One clear path each, decided in the first screen, rather than a homepage hedging between them.
Listings loaded through a widget or a portal iframe are invisible to search. Individual job pages on your own domain, with JobPosting structured data, are how candidates find you organically rather than only through portals.
Sectors you recruit for, roles filled, typical time to fill, and how you source. An employer is judging whether you can fill their specific role, not whether you have a nice website.
Applying should take under two minutes on a phone. Long forms and mandatory registration lose candidates to portals that make it easier.
We recruit across all industries is what every agency says and it convinces nobody. Depth in named sectors and role types is what makes an employer choose you.
You hold CVs and personal data. Storage, retention and who can access it should be stated, and increasingly employers ask about it during onboarding.
| Problem | Which audience it loses |
|---|---|
| Homepage hedging between both | Both |
| Job listings in a widget | Candidates, via search |
| No JobPosting structured data | Candidates, via Google job results |
| Long application form | Candidates, to easier portals |
| No sectors or roles named | Employers |
| No time-to-fill or process detail | Employers |
| Ask them | Good answer | Walk away if |
|---|---|---|
| Who owns the site and files? | You do, unconditionally, in the contract | Ownership depends on staying with them |
| Can I open three sites you built? | Live URLs you can check | Screenshots and a PDF |
| What is explicitly not included? | A written list with change pricing | Everything is included |
| How will we know it worked? | A metric agreed before work starts | Activity reports |
The exclusions question decides whether the final invoice matches the quote.
With two clear paths from the homepage, one for employers and one for candidates, decided in the first screen. They want opposite things, and a homepage that hedges between them serves neither well.
Usually because they load through a widget or portal iframe rather than rendering as pages on your own domain. Individual job pages with JobPosting structured data are what makes listings findable in Google's job results.
Under two minutes on a phone. Name, contact, CV upload and one or two role-specific questions. Long forms and mandatory registration lose candidates to portals that make applying easier.
It is what every agency says and it persuades nobody. Naming the sectors and role types you genuinely place in is what makes an employer believe you can fill their role. Breadth reads as no specialisation at all.
Sectors and roles you actually fill, how you source candidates, typical time to fill, and evidence of placements. They are judging capability for their specific role rather than the site itself.
You are holding CVs and personal information, so storage, retention and access should be stated. Employers increasingly ask about this during onboarding, and having an answer ready is worth more than it costs.
Send us what you are trying to fix and we will tell you what it takes, what it costs, and whether we are the right people for it. If we are not, we will say so.